Re: (usagi-users 00308) Re: USAGI IPv6 patches
Hello!
> What other platform does have the same semantics that mainstream linux?=20
Well, look into itojun's review to get summary of all the flavors.
Current diagnosis is that the only sane solution not breaking RFCs
is IPV6_V6ONLY. This is way, which we are going to follow.
> (bind9 docs say "The only OS which seems to do this is linux.")
What's about BIND... BIND need _not_ this feature at all.
And this is exactly which is to be understood by BIND maintainers.
Of course, it is their right to allocate miriads of useless sockets
and to bind them left and right. One is enough yet.
> Linux bind semantics force us to ignore errors,
Please, explain. I do not understand this statement... What is to
"ignore errors"?
> my book. I believe it's better to change linux behaviour to match the
> (IMHO more sane) one every other platform has instead of forcing usermode
> programmers to do something that isn't a right thing.
Seems, you still did not get the point. All the stacks except for
openbsd, NT and linux happen to be simply buggy. That's all.
The question is only in direction to move: to break RFC compliance
moving to openbsd/NT, or to preserve RFC compliance remaining in the state
of Linux (probably, but not necessaraily, with IPV6_V6ONLY).
Doubts that the last is the best look strange for me, at least now.
Alexey
Reply to: